Johnson: 'Clueless. Reckless. Hopeless.'
POLITICO | In a response to the Government's announcement of it's demobilisation plan, Shadow Defence Secretary Boris Johnson addressed the house to highlight what he described as "gross incompetence" on behalf of the sitting Government. Originally posted by Boris Johnson: Mr. Speaker, before I get into the specifics of this so called "plan", I would like to address certain claims made by my honourable friend the Treasury Secretary which have to be clarified. This so called "attempt" for bipartisan engagement on the issue of demobilisation was a façade at best. The sole fact that the Committee was composed of 9 out of 13 members who were either in the Government or supporting it, while Labour Democrats and Popular Republicans -- the entire opposition -- had just 2 members, myself and my honourable friend the Popular Republican leader of the opposition. How exactly, Mr. Speaker, is that bipartisan? To pretend that a Committee chaired entirely by the Government, which composes 70% of the Committee, is somehow an example of cooperation with the other 49% of members of this Chamber is truly worrisome. Now onto the specifics, or the lack thereof, of this plan -- Mr. Speaker. During the various meetings of the Demobilisation Committee, Labour Democrats rejected the Chancellor's original idea to demobilise on an unit basis -- rather than on an individual basis. This misguided premise of demobilising one army at the time completely ignored the logistical challenges of available shipping, but it also spits in the face of our veterans who have served the longest time in the front. How would it feel, Mr. Speaker, to be a soldier who's spent the past 5 years across the ocean, away from his loved ones, and to be held back indefinitely because you happen to be in the wrong unit? Meanwhile, soldiers recently conscripted and deployed could go back home before you simply because they happen to be in an unit which this government decided had the right to return earlier! That is why we proposed a simple points-system to the Committee in which eligibility and speed of demobilisation would be decided by how many months soldiers have spent on the front. First ones in, first ones out -- that is the only fair way to address this. The government's new alternatitve, Mr. Speaker, isn't any better. Is someone who's a teacher, labourer or a salesman more valuable and thus more entitled to returning home than someone who was previously a a carpenter, a mason, or an industrial operator? What are these arbitrary brackets based on? Has this government done any studies or made any assessments as to determine that the re-organisation of the labour market will result in the absorption of these groups into the market within the planned first six-weeks? Matter of factly, does this government have a comprehensive timeline for the demobilisation period? The Chief Secretary only explicitly referred to timing for his first bracket of soldiers, which would return within the next six weeks, but glossed over the other huge chunk of soldiers in the other brackets. Will the second bracket come home after 2 months? 6 months? A year? Has the government done any research as to estimate the duration of tthis process? A better question might be, Mr. Speaker, has this Government commissioned any studies into this issue whatsoever? Does the government know the available tonnage of shipping for the transport of soldiers abroad? Does the government have an estimate of necessary transport facilities which take into consideration the resumption of commercial shipping by elements of the merchant marine? Does the government have any estimates of workers currently employed in the war industry which will have to be discharged as the economy shifts back to it's peace status? More importantly on the last point, Mr. Speaker, the government has not addressed the issue of the millions of workers currently employed by the war-time military industrial complex. Does the government have any estimates of the amount of these workers? How exactly will it prevent the flooding of war workers into the labour market which will inevitably lead to an inefficient environment for returning soldiers that will be discharged into a market glutted with a labour surplus? Does the government have an estimate of the amount of federal contracts involving war production, and if so, what is their plan on the cancellation of these contracts and subsequently the effect of releasing the workers involved into the peacetime market? Does the government have a plan to address the influx of immigrants who have been travelling en-masse to countries like Falleentium from war-torn regions across the globe and how this will further affect the reintegration of people into meaningful employment? Has the government made any plans to fit the industrially unitiated, the new generation of adults seeking employment in the market, within the scheme of it's demobilisation policy? Has the government commissioned any studies as to ascertain the physical capacity of industry as we shift back into a peacetime economy? It is obvious, Mr. Speaker, that any conscious attempt to secure equality between the rate of flow into the labour market and the rate of opening of new employment through conscious control of any of the factors is impossible without at least an approximate estimate of anticipated employment. Does the government have any calculations on the total employment eventually to be offered, and of that available in the immediate future? Has the government at any point over the past year-and-a-half gathered reports from the market, from industry, from employers, on the estimates of their future demands for labour? Has the government taken into account future tax policy, the future trends of exploitative commerce and continuance or non-continuance of market priorities, and the likes, into the drafting of their demobilisation plans? The statement made by the Chief Secretary tells me that neither he nor his government have any answers to these and other innately important questions to such a complex issue. This barebone, almost arrogantly ignorant assesment of what demobilisation is, ignoring how expansive it is beyond "bringing our boys back" within an undefined period of time -- shows what the state of this government really is, Mr. Speaker. And I shall be taking the liberty to describe it with just three words: Clueless; Reckless; Hopeless. The adjustments necessary, as comprehensive and delicate in nature as the ones relevant to the re-organisation of industry, can be made only on the basis of the most comprehensive and accurate information. With a government set on de-funding the government by eliminating our revenue at a time where the deficit is at it's highest; and a bloodlust for massive cuts to public services and workers which could serve as a buffer and a tool to ameliorate the massive influx of labour into the market -- I fear that these questions will not be answered in time, nor correctly. I yield, Mr. Speaker. Category:The Imperial Constitution